I have a hard time with that too... not the jury bit, but that anyone on a jury would buy "I didn't know I hit something that weighed at least 100 lbs..." I would think a good photo of the damage to the vehicle would be enough.

Let's not forget that investigators collected some samples from the steering wheel. In the scenario where the driver stopped, wiped incriminating evidence off his bumper, got back in and drove on, traces of the cyclist could be there. That would lend weight to his knowing that he did hit something, and would be more consistent with something to hide than with hitting a deer or dog. Depending on what he removed - what they found on the steering wheel - he'd know it wasn't an animal.

How many times are we going to hear "I didn't know I hit anyone or anything?" That is NOT a legitimate answer/excuse for running.

Well, no, it is a legitimate answer for not stopping. No one stops if they don't know that they've hit anything. That's why they say it. It's a lie, of course - but that's to be expected. And of course they want to tell a lie that exonerates them, if believed.

(Alternatively, it's the truth, but only in part of the truth - they may not have known that they hit anything because they were drunk out of their mind.)

Originally Posted by genec

I am trying to figure out how these folks don't know they hit something... what is it about them as drivers or the vehicles they drive that gives them the impression that everything is OK?

I mean if something happens to your vehicle that leaves "samples on the steering wheel" isn't pretty obvious that this is not a normal thing?

I think you've overthinking this - they are just lying. (I do wonder what's on the steering wheel. It's not going to be the case that the victim impacted the steering wheel; evidence would be all over the front of the car in that case. I wonder if the driver banged his head on the wheel when he hit the biker. Or maybe the driver got out of the car and checked on the victim and got some blood on his hands and transferred it to the steering wheel.)

Originally Posted by mcrow

My uncle has a neighbor the lives across the alley from him that has in the neighborhood of 15 DUIs including a manslaughter on record as a result of one of them.............and still has a license. We're supposed to have a 3 strikes and your out policy here but it seems like there are holes in it.

The neighbor almost certainly does not still have his license. He may still be driving, he may claim to still have his license, and he may have what looks like a license. But I'm 100% certain that if you check with the BMV you'll find out he doesn't actually have a valid license.

I have a hard time with that too... not the jury bit, but that anyone on a jury would buy "I didn't know I hit something that weighed at least 100 lbs..."

... but even so, juries do buy it quite often. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" means different things to different people, and in many cases it means they have to be pretty damned sure. And really, hitting a big pothole could feel like hitting a body to an idiot, especially a drunk idiot.

That said, if evidence was found on the steering wheel that indicates that the person stopped and cleaned up the car and continued, that should blow that claim out of the water. Assuming that the evidence can show that it happened immediately, and that it couldn't have happened the next day.

... but even so, juries do buy it quite often. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" means different things to different people, and in many cases it means they have to be pretty damned sure. And really, hitting a big pothole could feel like hitting a body to an idiot, especially a drunk idiot.

That said, if evidence was found on the steering wheel that indicates that the person stopped and cleaned up the car and continued, that should blow that claim out of the water. Assuming that the evidence can show that it happened immediately, and that it couldn't have happened the next day.

I have it on some authority what they're doing with the steering wheel is testing for booze residue, secreted through the pores. It gives them at least a ballpark if the perp has been drinking. Again, I think the RPD are being extra diligent in this. I've had issues with them in the past, but they're taking this investigation seriously, by every account I have.

Sounds like this is more of a local city/police problem, as theyre the idiots who continued to let this person drive? Im beyond sick of reading about all these folks with multiple violations, being allowed to drive.

While that sounds like a lot, it's only two a year. While certainly on the high side, it wouldn't surprise me if over 10% of the drivers out there had similar records.

I don't understand how having a record like this can be considered in any way normal. I accept that people DO get records like this, but it's just outside my experience. Nobody in my family has more than maybe 2 or 3 lifetime citations, many have none. I don't understand a culture that considers getting traffic citations on any kind of a regular basis is normal. I guess it is though since I often see people considering the cost of a traffic ticket to be part of the cost of driving. Just seems bizarre to me though.

I don't understand how having a record like this can be considered in any way normal.

It depends on how a person was raised, and with dad and his lawyer continually pulling junior out of the fire, junior sees life differently than the many others who are not able to do or afford the same treatment. Just remember, the high number of convictions are only the tip of the iceberg that junior were caught violating, and with many of the charges being reduced considerably, it only emboldened junior's driving habits even more.

I'm probably jinxing myself, but I haven't gotten a traffic citation since 1985. If you are getting 2 a year, that means you are an utter tool and driving with recklessness on a fairly consistent basis

Not only the cost of a ticket, but the added cost to your insurance. That seems pretty outrageous to me, but maybe for people who do long commutes on the highway they consider that the normal cost of driving. Weird to me though.

Punctuation is important. It's the difference between "I helped my uncle, Jack, off a horse" and "I helped my uncle Jack off a horse"

I'm probably jinxing myself, but I haven't gotten a traffic citation since 1985. If you are getting 2 a year, that means you are an utter tool and driving with recklessness on a fairly consistent basis

Star Wars and Billy Beer were brand new when I received my one and only speeding ticket, and the way my family chides me about my slow driving, I won't be jinxing myself.

I don't understand how having a record like this can be considered in any way normal.

I didn't say it was "normal". I said that it wouldn't surprise me if the worst 10% of the drivers on the road had similar records. And that it's probably not enough to trigger any sort of drivers license suspension or surcharge penalty if the offences were spread out.

It's interesting that the perp works for the Richmond Times-Dispatch and the victim's mother works for a competing newspaper. One thing's for sure, this will get a lot of coverage in both newspapers. I hope that when the perp is found guilty, he loses his job.

While that sounds like a lot, it's only two a year. While certainly on the high side, it wouldn't surprise me if over 10% of the drivers out there had similar records.

Given that he can probably take defensive driving once a year and get rid of one of those offences, this probably isn't even enough to trigger additional fines or loss of drivers licenses (I don't know Virginia laws regarding this, however -- this is just a guess.)

Hopefully they'll nail him for the hit and run now, however.

"Only" two a year? I've been driving for 16 years and I have one moving violation, which probably won't even show up on my record because it was bogus. Was doing 45 in a 45 and a cop pulled me over saying I was doing 65. Wrote me a ticket telling me to go to court on a night that court wasn't in session. Called the police department the next day and they said they have no record of that ticket ever being issued, and I obtained documented proof of that fact.

It is inexcusable to get 19 violations in 10 years. It's not hard to drive by the rules.

"Only" two a year? I've been driving for 16 years and I have one moving violation, which probably won't even show up on my record because it was bogus. Was doing 45 in a 45 and a cop pulled me over saying I was doing 65. Wrote me a ticket telling me to go to court on a night that court wasn't in session. Called the police department the next day and they said they have no record of that ticket ever being issued, and I obtained documented proof of that fact.

It is inexcusable to get 19 violations in 10 years. It's not hard to drive by the rules.

Was that one of those fake cops? I've heard of cop imposters pulling people over and giving them tickets and, when they find a woman who they want, extorting them for "favors" in lieu of writing the ticket.

Punctuation is important. It's the difference between "I helped my uncle, Jack, off a horse" and "I helped my uncle Jack off a horse"

Let's not forget that investigators collected some samples from the steering wheel. In the scenario where the driver stopped, wiped incriminating evidence off his bumper, got back in and drove on, traces of the cyclist could be there. That would lend weight to his knowing that he did hit something, and would be more consistent with something to hide than with hitting a deer or dog. Depending on what he removed - what they found on the steering wheel - he'd know it wasn't an animal.

You really think this will get THAT kind of dilligence/attention from investigators? there are a NUMBER(Im sure) of investigators who are too lazy to care, or do just enough to cover their own asses. IMO, this is looking more and more like whoever's involved in the investigation/litigation of this case, is looking very IMBECILLIC, and gthey're showing a lack of caring about it, and so forth. Of course this is just MY opinion. I'd be REALLY surprised if the driver gets much of a sentence, or forced to pay any kind of restitution, or have his/her license revoked.(Thats what SHOULD HAPPEN, but wont)

Okay, update. Webb has been indicted on felony hit and run charges by a grand jury. The charges carry a sentence of one to ten years. Other charges may be forthcoming; the police investigation continues. Lemond, the police really do appear to be making a real effort on this one. I would reserve judgement on them here (I don't care to reserve judgement on Webb; the title of this thread stands. Maybe he's a nice guy, but he's a tool behind the wheel, and he likes to dodge responsibility).

I went on the memorial ride on Sunday, in a group of about 150 riders. The police intentionally left the ride undisturbed. The group I was with rode with Lanie's boyfriend. It was one of the saddest things I have ever seen; we stopped at her school, where there is a memorial wall, and the site of the accident. Everyone stood in silence as the boyfriend sat at both locations and remembered her. I'm choking up right now. It was an amazing crowd of riders, all ages, sexes, and races. It was beautiful and it was sad. I really do not know how to describe it. It gave me hope and it made me cry. All at once.

Fifteen years ago, I had a friend killed by a right hooking driver. There was no ride like this, no indictment. I have hope for the human race yet.

Lemond, the police really do appear to be making a real effort on this one. I would reserve judgement on them here (I don't care to reserve judgement on Webb; the title of this thread stands. Maybe he's a nice guy, but he's a tool behind the wheel, and he likes to dodge responsibility).

.

Maybe......I've just read/seen/heard about way too many cops/investigators/LEO's who dont give a crap, unless it's a friend of their's, or a family member/etc. Plus, Im sure they're catching alot of stuff from the press and mayor and are forced to do it? Not sure..... We'll have to wait to see what the sentence is before I can really make a better opinion.

Sure hit someone and kill them. Go home and get sobber, then report the accident. Its the old Teddy Kennedy ploy.

In Quebec, by the law, it is a worst crime to hit and run than to be DUI, to discourage people to run away like that. They changed the law few years ago after there's been a lot of cases in the same summer. It's a bit better since but it still happen from time to time.

Originally Posted by Leebo
Headwind is like a hill without a soul. Just gear down and suffer.